Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-11-02 TIIDA PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I HEARING TRANSCRIPT NOVEMBER 2, 2007 JINSOO AND RAN HUI IIDA A regularly advertised hearing on the application of (REZ 07-000073) was called to order at 11:49 a.m. in the County of Hawaii, Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawaii, with First Vice-Chairman C. Kimo Alameda presiding. PRESENT: C. Kimo Alameda ABSENT & EXCUSED: William Graham Takashi Domingo Rene’ Siracusa Andrew Iwashita Alvin Rho Shelly Ogata Rodney Watanabe Rell Woodward Ivan Torigoe, Deputy Corporation Counsel Christopher Yuen, Planning Director Phyllis Fujimoto, Staff Planner Jeff Darrow, Staff Planner And approximately 12 people from the public in attendance APPLICANT: JINSOO AND RAN HUI IIDA (REZ 07-000073) Change of Zone from Single Family Residential 10,000 square feet (RS-10) to a Neighborhood Commercial 20,000 square feet (CN-20) for 23,559 square feet of land. The property is located along the west side of Kilauea Avenue, approximately 420 feet south of the Kilauea Avenue – Puainako Street intersection, Waiakea Homestead House Lots, South Hilo, Hawaii, Tax Map Key: 2-2-40:121. ALAMEDA: So third agenda item and final agenda item for today. I’d like to introduce Item 3, Jinsoo and Ran Hui Iida.It’s Rezoning 07-000073. I’d like to turn it over for Mr. Darrow to give an introduction. Mr. Darrow? DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I can direct the attention of the Planning Commission to the location map. Again, the area of our application is within South Hilo. More specifically we’re looking at this large gray line as Kanoelehua; and this is running in a north-south direction. Running in an east-west direction, gray line, we have Puainako Street; and running perpendicular with Kanoelehua is Kilauea and Kinoole Street. Just for reference, this pink area is the KTA Puainako Shopping Center area. It runs between Puainako Street and Kahaopea Street; and we also have on the corner, the pink area is the location of Kai Store and Noodle Factory that you might be familiar with. Recently we had a change of zone before the Commission, Ginger Patch. That’s located in this area on the corner of Kilauea and Puainako Street. The blue dot EXHIBIT C 1 represents the area of this application. The yellow signifies Single Family Residential zoning. The applicants in this case, Jinsoo and Ran Hui Iida, are requesting a change of zone from Single Family Residential 10,000 square feet to Neighborhood Commercial 20,000 square feet for 23,559 square feet of land. Referring to the applicant’s plot plan that is submitted, we have the parcel identified with a, outlined with a blue line. We have Kilauea running on the right side of the map. Entrance is on the south side of the property identified with brown. The applicants are requesting this change of zone to be able to locate their beauty salon identified as Lani’s Beauty Salon within an existing dwelling identified in red. They’re proposing to have four chairs as well as a waxing room within this one-bedroom one-bath dwelling. Additionally on the property there is another dwelling. The applicants at this time are trying to correct a problem with the permitting to be able to permit this as a second dwelling on the property.They’re in the process at this time. There has been a letter to that effect submitted to the Commission. The proposed layout is identified. Entrance from Kilauea, a single location with parking in this general location, again, with the salon identified in red. At this time the applicants are proposing to utilize the second dwelling for dwelling purposes; but in the future, if approved, they may use this for office space. Since this application, well, let me speak to this application. This is a unique situation in the sense that usually when we look at these applications in reference to the General Plan LUPAG Map we look at it from a broadbrush perspective. These lines usually are not, you know, exact. But in certain circumstances we do look at these lines as being, you know, more exact in nature. And the instances that we will look at that is when these run along an identified road or if those particular, that particular area was changed by metes and bounds. In this particular application, the General Plan between Medium Density Urban and Single Family, or Low Density Urban is identified with the separation through Kilauea Street. And so at this point even though in the application it states that the General Plan has identified it as Medium Density the Planning Director interprets it as Low Density Urban based on that separation from Kilauea Street. The Planning Director, mainly based on this particular issue but others spoken to in the application, is recommending an unfavorable recommendation be sent by the Planning Commission to the Hawaii County Council. Since this application was sent to the Planning Commission, we have received several correspondence to bring to your attention. One is a comment letter dated October 25, 2007 from the Department of Public Works. Additionally, we’ve received a comment letter from Department of Water Supply dated October 19, 2007. And, again, we’ve received a letter from the applicants in reference to the second dwelling; and, additionally, this morning, there has been another correspondence from the applicants that has been passed out to the Planning Commission. Are there any questions? ALAMEDA: Seeing none, will the applicants or representative please come forward. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth now before the Hawaii County Planning Commission? EXHIBIT C 2 APPLICANTS: I do. ALAMEDA: Thank you. I’m going to ask, maybe starting on my far left, could you please state your name and address for the record. W. IIDA: My name is Walter Iida. My address, too? ALAMEDA: Sure. W. IIDA: It’s 899 Kulaloa Road, Hilo, Hawaii. ALAMEDA: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Iida. . W. IIDA: This is my son and -. ALAMEDA: Okay, all right. Thank you. Sir -? J. IIDA: My name is Jinsoo Iida, 11 Hoohoaloha Street, Hilo, Hawaii. R. IIDA: My name is Ran Hui. You can call me Lani, same as Jinsoo, 11 Hoohoaloha Street. ALAMEDA: Thank you, Lani. Who’s going to be the spokesperson today? J. IIDA: I am. ALAMEDA: Okay. Sir, did you get a chance to look at the Department’s recommendation? Actually it’s a negative recommendation. And do you have any comments? J. IIDA: Yes, I did. Not at this time. ALAMEDA: Okay. Do we have any questions for our applicants or their representative? Commissioner Iwashita. IWASHITA: I guess we had a couple of letters, your neighbors, supporting your application. Are there any neighbors that are, that you know of that’s opposing your application? J. IIDA: Not at this time. ALAMEDA: Let me ask, sir, I know you wanted to just be there as more of a support. W. IIDA: Yes. EXHIBIT C 3 ALAMEDA: But do you have anything to add to your son’s application or -? W. IIDA: No, we just put together some comments that was passed out this morning. ALAMEDA: Okay. All right, well, there’s no testifiers. So -. DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman? ALAMEDA: Commissioner Domingo? DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman. Am I to understand that you folks have a home occupation permit already? J. IIDA: Yes, we do. DOMINGO: And that, are you on the premise doing business right now? R. IIDA: Yes. DOMINGO: For how long? R. IIDA: It’s been 2 ½ months. DOMINGO: Two and a half months, I see. So actually you can still go ahead and do what you’re doing even if we deny this application, right? R. IIDA: Well, I was in the place I was renting and I needed to move out; and I don’t know where else to go. And I went to County Building, and then I asking for it, and then I got approved. So hopefully I’m there and doing my business. I just want to say that this is my idea and I want to pursue my career, and this is one of my dreams. And actually nobody was believing me, you know. Like everybody thought, oh, she going nuts. But this is my dream. So we come this far. And when I was looking at the location I was just looking around. Of course I didn’t want to go to Downtown or up Puainako, the rent is really, really high, and I do not want to go to Keaau; and I don’t know where else to go. And when that was on sale, I just falling in love. And finally when I bought the property, actually a neighbor came down and say that, you know, I mean, thank me that, I guess the use of the property was, there was drugs going on, and trashes, and always fights, and motorcycles, you know, with gangs going on. And couple of neighbors actually came down, cause my husband and I have to really clean, throw away the trash. And there’s so much dirt and dog, you know, everywhere; and we had to work really, really hard. And just looking at, you know, location and searching around, we have no idea. I thought was perfect location. And my husband and I we have, everything we have we EXHIBIT C 4 put in this property. And then last week we got this bright yellow paper about General Map Plan. My husband and I was sitting down and had deep breath, like wow, this is, cannot be because we have no clue about the General Plan, the map and -. ALAMEDA: Okay. R. IIDA: Yeah, I just want to say that I’m not trying to make a, you know, factory going on. I’m just, you know, doing my business; and I just want to stay and making, you know, reasonable place and, then comparable and, you know, easy to get in and easy to get out, and to my make a living. That’s all. ALAMEDA: Okay. Follow-up? DOMINGO: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, again? ALAMEDA: Sure. DOMINGO: You folks have developed the property, cleaned the property and paved the property? You’ve already paved it? J. IIDA: For the safety of the customers. We cut down the trees that were hanging and we have paved the ground. Like we had some cracks on the ground. It was all for the safety of the customers. And we did a legal permit, we did. ALAMEDA: Commissioner Domingo? DOMINGO: That’s all. ALAMEDA: Okay. Well, let me just share, you know, when the Department makes a negative recommendation that’s basically telling us that they’re not okay with what they see in the application. And that’s the kind of background information we have in addition to the application. So I wonder if I could ask the Director if, you know, could you summarize your premise on the negative recommendation for us? That would be very helpful. YUEN: Okay. Let’s, probably the easiest place to start is with the General Plan Map, which is Exhibit 2, and you have that in front of you. And you see the intersection of Puainako Street and Kilauea? This is a map with various colors on it. And Exhibit 2, and we see the subject property in blue. And there is generally some flexiblity in interpreting the map; but we would not interpret this map, for the site to be Medium Density Urban. One is that there does seem, and this mapping goes back I’m fairly certain to even the 1971 General Plan.It has been mapped exactly like this. That, first, there’s a conscious idea of having Kilauea Avenue one side as Medium Density Urban and the other side as, say is Low Density Urban, Low Density Urban meaning predominantly single family in character. Low Density Residential you can have, you know, some Multi-Family as long as the overall density is not more than six an acre. EXHIBIT C 5 Then if you go up to Puainako Street, there is a, the Medium Density Urban extends a little bit south along Puainako Street, you know, in a direction down the page; and that point there on the mauka corner there is Kai Store and the Maebo Noodle Factory. And the zoning for those also goes back to the late sixties or early seventies. So we do think that there was a conscious intention that the Commercial areas here be limited to the other side of Kilauea Avenue and the corner of Puainako Street and Kilauea. And to say otherwise leads you to a situation where you just potentially march down Kilauea with commercial uses. And, you know, to relate this to the previous application as Commission Member Iwashita was trying to do, in the Waiakea Houselots area it was consciously, there was a decision, there was a General Plan Amendment to map the area as Medium Density Urban. There is an actual decision to do that; and that’s in the General Plan Maps. In this area, it is a Low Density area. Now the applicant in their letter does correctly point out that the wording of Low Density does not completely prohibit commercial uses, but it’s supposed to be commercial uses that are related to the immediate neighborhood. Whereas this is really something that would draw customers from wherever people found this, you know, made typically some kind of relationship with a person who works there. At a certain low level the Zoning Code does allow this kind of thing to be operated out of a home without a rezoning. The limitation, the main limitations are that you’re limited on your signage and you can have only one employee, in addition to the occupants of the home. So essentially if only, say only one of the occupant of the home works in the beauty business then they could have one other employee on site as a home occupation. The final thing I’d like to mention is that even if we were inclined to, the Commission is inclined to rezone, then you have the question of conditions of zoning. And if you look at the Public Works recommended conditions of road widening, curbs, gutters and sidewalks, for a Commercial zone, which is their standard recommendation, you would be looking at a very expensive improvement in order to establish a Commercial zone on the site. ALAMEDA: All right. I know that’s a lot of words and let me just try to summarize for the applicant. So what Mr. Yuen is saying is that what makes this different than the previous application which the Department, see how it works is you send in your application, the Department, they look at it and they make a recommendation. And then they give their recommendation to us and then we consider that and other evidence to make our decision. And so the Department said not good; and so, because it’s actually kind of like Low Density which means not too many people, not too many traffic. So to grant it would actually increase the density; and that’s why they’re saying not good for this application.But then, you know we may disagree with that or we may agree. And so we don’t know yet, that’s where we’re going to have this talk story. So, Commissioner Iwashita, you have thoughts on this? IWASHITA: I guess just to clarify, you just recently purchased this property? Is that right? EXHIBIT C 6 J. IIDA: Yes. Back in April? R. IIDA: April. J. IIDA: April. IWASHITA: Okay. And you’re requesting this change, the change of zone so that you can have more than two people work in your business? J. IIDA: To grow the business. IWASHITA: Yeah, okay. You understand that the last comment I guess made by the Director was that if the Commission, you know considers approving your application, that one of the conditions would be, you know, putting in a sidewalk and, you know, widening the road along Kilauea Avenue in front of your property; and that’s an expensive, you know, proposition? You understand that? J. IIDA: We do, yes. IWASHITA: Okay. And that’s something that’s agreeable to you? J. IIDA: I know that in order to improve the, I mean, grow the business, we need to invest. IWASHITA: Right. So you’ve got to make sidewalks like we have outside this building, the road would have to be wider? J. IIDA: If that’s what come, our plan is we’ll follow whatever the Planning Department is asking, because we want to run as a legal business. IWASHITA: Okay. J. IIDA: Yes. IWASHITA: Okay, thank you. ALAMEDA: How about on this side? Let’s go with Commissioner Domingo and then Commissioner Watanabe. Commissioner Domingo? DOMINGO: Yes. Can someone point to me where that old Food Fair shopping center is? Is that the southernmost parcel? WATANABE: No, it’s in the middle I think. OGATA: It’s in the middle. EXHIBIT C 7 DOMINGO: Where is that? WATANABE: It’s in the middle. OGATA: Right there. DARROW: Food Fair. I believe that’s, it’s on Kinoole Street, correct? DOMINGO: Yeah, Kinoole Street, okay. DARROW: Yeah, that would be over in this area, I believe. J. IIDA: Right, right above. Yeah, that one. OGATA: Kahaopea. J. IIDA: Yeah, yeah. OGATA: The pink. DARROW: Right here, the pink, okay. DOMINGO: Okay, okay. And what’s the pink beyond that? DARROW: Here? DOMINGO: Yeah. IWASHITA: Kandi’s Drive Inn. OGATA: Kandi’s. DOMINGO: Kand’s Drive Inn, okay, okay. DARROW: Yeah, this would be here Pizza Hut and the little gas station and Kandi’s, and the gas station there. DOMINGO: You know, I think in the very beginning you started to try to describe the LUPAG map and where the lines are drawn; and I kind of understand that, you know, it can be real flexible as to where you want to really delineate the extent of where the boundary for Low Density and Medium Density is, yeah. As I look at that and consider the existing land uses, and especially when you look at the old Food Fair being as huge as it is and being given the land use approval to build that, and I compare it to this small parcel that they’re trying to develop, you know, I think, I find no reason whatsoever why they should be denied, to deny the use of the land as suggested by the application. And it’s within, if you look at it, it’s within the core of a similar land uses EXHIBIT C 8 and that I think it does not show -. Now there’s Maebo and next to their property is a chiropractor, yes, and Kai Store. So, you know, again, as indicated he can go one way or the other; and I reflect on a comment somebody made to me many, many years ago that, you know, in planning there’s no right or wrong. I mean, of course, you have the guidelines and everything, but there’s a lot of flexibility that you can apply with this; and that’s my comment right now. ALAMEDA: Let me, just real quick so I can get this back on track. Okay, so if we have any questions for our applicants, then we can get into the talk story if you want to make comments. So let me just ask Fellow Commissioners if you have questions, then raise your hand and I’ll call on you. But if you don’t have questions, let me ask the applicants and the representative to sit down, then we can talk stories. Seeing no further questions for the applicants, thank you, you may be seated. We don’t have any testimony so -. Okay, Fellow Commissioners, thank you. Now we can talk story. So I was going to Commissioner Watanabe and then I’ll hit Commissioner Woodward right after that. So, Commissioner Watanabe, go ahead. WATANABE: Unlike Commissioner Iwashita, I see a difference between this one as opposed to the Houselots area because of the amount of time that the Houselots area has been changing. That said though I was wondering if Mr.Yuen could let us know if, you know that chiropractor practice that they’re talking about, is that zoned Commercial or is he doing this just out of his home, you know, again, one employee or whatever? YUEN: That’s actually operated under a use permit. And at the time that came in, you could have a medical clinic under a use permit. So there are several medical clinics scattered around Hilo and in Residential zones that are done under use permits. So it never was Commercial. It is probably beyond the scale of a home occupation. ALAMEDA: Follow-up? WATANABE: Just comment. You know, to me it’s a little bit different when you change the actual zoning to Commercial when it’s home use. She has a small operation there. You know, I suppose that would go on unless there were complaints from the neighbors because we don’t have the manpower to go out and seek out every single violation that may exist. So, you know, I don’t see us taking her bread away, even if we deny this. And, you know, to Mr. Iwashita’s comments you know, I think we’re kind of spreading that syndrome if we approve this as a Commercial zoning. ALAMEDA: All right. Then we’re moving on down to my left side over here. Commissioner Woodward, go ahead. WOODWARD: Well, I would agree with Commissioner Domingo. If you look at this map that we were supplied with and despite Director’s Yuen’s claim that there was some rationale on how this was put together, it looks to me like a kindergartener threw paint at the wall. If you see, there’s an area down here that is disconnected from EXHIBIT C 9 everything else. The lot that they’re talking about is right across the street from an area where there would be no problem with rezoning; and it’s two lots away from another area that there would be no problem. You know, I think we take ourselves a little too seriously sometimes thinking that we have a game plan; and I think this is one time where this fits in with the community, there’s no community objection to it; and I would be in favor of their proposal. ALAMEDA: All right, let me take it back to this side. Mr. Yuen? YUEN: You know, if you don’t stick to, if you don’t follow the game plan, then you have no game plan. This actually is an area where the General Plan, you can actually see very clearly what the General Plan was trying to do. If you compare, and let’s take the pink area right there. That is the Food Fair, what was the Food Fair shopping center, which has since closed and is now a group of government offices. That corresponds almost exactly with the Medium Density area on the map here. The block that’s shown in the Kahaopea Street and Kinoole Street area is that block. That was zoned as a commercial block at the intersection of two major streets consistently with the General Plan. The other, if you go down south to the other block there -- and we didn’t run the map down that far, the General Plan map -- that’s also Medium Density Urban in the General Plan. That’s a commercial area that’s at the intersection of two major streets and is zoned that way. The General Plan was followed. You created a commercial area where you have a group of businesses at the intersections of major streets. Up at the intersection of Puainako, and that’s getting right where we are, you had, you know, even before the General Plan was there you already had commercial. You had the noodle factory and the Kai Store already there; and the General Plan followed what was there and the zoning followed what was there. So you had these commercial clumps. You know, naturally you have, you have an applicant who is trying to do a very small project yet it is a Commercial rezoning. It’s a CN rezoning. It permits a 7-Eleven, it permits a commercial building, it permits a 20-unit apartment building under the zoning. And if anybody else, then certainly anybody going down Kilauea Avenue on that side of the street is, it’s a precedent for a future rezoning on that side of Kilauea Avenue. So try to, you know, we are supposed to follow the General Plan and there is a clear rationale for what the General Plan is trying to do in this area. ALAMEDA: Let me just ask for follow-up. Mr. Woodward, any follow-up to that? WOODWARD: Well, no, I take your explanation. But I think that’s the place of the Planning Commission, is in reasonable situations to grant essentially variances and approve or recommend approval of zoning that while it may not fit exactly with the General Plan it is within the general characteristic of the neighborhood; and that would be my take on it. ALAMEDA: I appreciate your take. How about Commissioner Watanabe? EXHIBIT C 10 WATANABE: Yeah, okay. You know, earlier we were emphasizing, what is that, cross-easements; and when you’re looking at shopping complexes as KTA and adjoining complexes, they all have cross-easements. It’s not like, you know, cause you have rather large lots but you have only a certain amount of access to Kilauea Avenue from the back portion of KTA and some of the other complexes there, as well as the -. I guess, the County and the Fire Department has offices there. You know, as we go down this road, all of these lots on the mauka side of Kilauea Avenue are all individually owned, so you’re not going to have the ability for cross-easements. So each individual lot is an entry point into Kilauea. And this is where, you know, and I really have nothing against the applicant or even the particular business the applicant is proposing to do. The thing is the zoning will run with the land and the 7-Eleven’s will come in. And then right next door you’re going to have another camera shop, or whatever it is, and then right next door you’re going to have -. It’s going to look like a Manono Street, the same thing they’ve been complaining in Houselots. The problem that, for me the difference is it hasn’t really taken root yet here. Whereas in Houselots when I was a kid riding a bike it was already there. It was already changing, 40 years ago it was changing. So, you know, so I don’t have that much of an issue there. Here it’s not changing yet.But I think as you start moving in that direction that’s exactly what’s going to happen. ALAMEDA: All right, I know Commissioner Iwashita loves the irony in this one, but go ahead, Commissioner Iwashita. IWASHITA: There’s no irony, I don’t think so. Well, I have to disagree with Commissioner Watanabe about, you know, the character of the neighborhood. I rode my bike to get to my hair cut in Houselots 50 years ago, you know and it was just Atebara Potato Chips and couple of other things. But it really hadn’t changed that much, in my opinion until, you know, the seventies, eighties, the change of zone and so forth. Yeah, so there has been in change in there. But if you look at this map, if you just look at this map where that dot is, there are much more commercial areas, commercially-zoned property around that dot than there is, you know, in the Manono thing. And I guess my comment about or my observation about zoning and the role it plays and so forth, as far as, you know, how utilitarian it is on how we follow the rules -- Big Island Candies to me is, I’m sorry, is the worst example of how zoning should be done. You take an industrial project and you put it in the middle of a residential neighborhood? I mean, you know, that’s, we make exceptions, right? And, you know, when you’re Big Island Candies you can get an industrial rezoning, you know, a candy factory in the middle of a residential neighborhood. And, you know, the justification for that was that this neighborhood is changing, there’s industrial on Kanoelehua, so on and so forth. So in this case, and I, you all know, you know, I really believe that there should be the community development planning done; and there’s really no exception here. You know, in every case it really should be done. I look at this differently because, one, the applicant has made an effort to talk to the neighbors, the immediate neighbors, about getting this project done and wanting to do what they do; and the two responses in writing have been, it’s fine with us. Okay? So we don’t have a community development plan here but in my mind -. You know, there’s Clint’s Garage, right, which is I guess a EXHIBIT C 11 grandfathered use which didn’t make the map on the corner of Kahaopea and Kilauea, which is the southwest lot, on that southwest corner. Right? And there’s a barbershop there, competitor right there; and I’m not sure what the zoning is, how that’s done. But, you know, that shop doesn’t even have proper parking. People park on the grass and stuff. You know, it’s not really done correctly. So yeah, zoning, we should be consistent. I hope the Director’s comments would apply to 15.1, community development plan, and do what the law says, do the community development plans, do them all at once. But since it ain’t being done, you know, notwithstanding my persistence added, I don’t know why -. But in this case because to me the applicants made an effort to go in the neighborhood and figure things out and undisputedly has improved the neighborhood by taking over this property, I, you know -. And I understand the Director’s concern about there are, you know, you can have a 7-Eleven, you can have all these other uses, and maybe in the future you can make a lot of money to selling off to one of those people. But I, you know, for present purposes I don’t have any real strong concerns at this point that that this is really outside what the General Plan says. I mean the line it’s stipulated at the beginning is a soft line. And to me the way this neighborhood has developed -- especially over my objections, again, the passage of the other rezoning on Puainako Street, you know those kinds of things are going on -- I cannot see, I’ll make an exception to my insistence of a community development plan in this case and I will support this application. ALAMEDA: Okay. Commissioner Domingo. DOMINGO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As a continuance of my arguments, the only issue here is where would you draw the line as depicted on the LUPAG Map. The LUPAG Map is a map that is used to carry out the General Plan. Okay. It was decided that that line, that line of demarcation, would be towards the Taniguchi area; and across Kilauea would still be Low Density. You know, many years ago when only Downtown existed it was like development should only happen Downtown. But things have changed, as we all know. And as we look at the history of Hilo, tidal waves and the pressure for growth and development taking place, tidal waves forced us to come to Kaiko Mall and forced us to go to Hilo Shopping Center. And, you know, then we find the commercial core of Hilo Downtown was so-called broken up and that then there were other opportunities for people with properties to develop their properties, to rezone and develop their properties into a commercial area. And because of that we have the commercial core here in Kaikoo Mall, and Hilo Shopping Center, and the latest is up Puainako, no not the latest. In fact then we went to Food Fair up at Kinoole, and then after that we went to Puainako, you know, below Kinoole, and then after that we went to Puainako Shopping Center. And flexible, planning has been real flexible in this case. I remember once before there was a statement made that commercialization of properties should not go far beyond the street where you have the State Agricultural Complex. On that street going up, that was once spoken of that we confine urban, commercial development north of that area up to Downtown Hilo. But no, it has gone beyond that. And what I’m saying is that planning is flexible. And even the same as this line that we refer to on the LUPAG Map, we’re saying this side is Medium Density and that side is EXHIBIT C 12 Low Density, and it should be kept Residential. But look what’s happening, you know. And then when we ask ourselves what about the future of the whole Hilo area, where would other Urban expansion take place, you know, where will this Urban expansion take place? We’re talking about the University of Hawaii Hilo Campus. And we’re talking about the development of that area to provide for commercial uses for the students who go there and those who live in the proximity of the University. So, you know, you will find demands and the need to consider for other expansion, commercial businesses, a commercial expansion. And I see that this particular area that we’re talking about will be part of that, certainly will be part of that expansion of Medium Density which would provide for commercial uses. So I see no reason, and I think this application is in line with what the future of Hilo would be like. And to deny them this opportunity is, I don’t feel that I should be a part of that. Therefore, I would still speak for the favorable recommendation of this application. ALAMEDA: All right, let me, I know everybody had a chance to put their opinion in the pot, except Commissioner Ogata. I just wanted to offer the opportunity if you had anything. If not, that’s okay. OGATA: I applaud the applicants for doing their part in their community to make the property that they purchased, you know, a better place. And I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with what they’re doing right now as far as a home occupation and running the salon out of their property. I am having a struggle with changing the zoning just because we can’t, at least I don’t believe that we can stipulate that they can only do the salon there. I mean, other things can happen. And I don’t know, so anyway, that’s my area right now that I’m struggling with. But I do hope that they can continue what they have done. ALAMEDA: Okay, again, I’m kind of ready to put the cover on the opinion pot. But Commissioner Iwashita, any comments? IWASHITA: I just wanted clarification on the record. ALAMEDA: Sure. IWASHITA: The notice was posted properly in this case, Jeff? ALAMEDA: Mr. Darrow, was the notices posted properly on this agenda item? DARROW: Correct. IWASHITA: And the mailings to the adjoining owners were done within the 500 feet, that was all done? DARROW: Both notices went out to the surrounding properties. EXHIBIT C 13 ALAMEDA: But I’d also like to make one note that my Corp. Counsel shared with me at the recess, was that we don’t have to formally close the hearing unless it’s a contested case. And sometimes it might be good not to close the hearing cause then we could go back to our applicants and have them clarify some questions that we might have. And so in this particular case I’d like to do that right now. I know Lani you had your hand up for something. Is that a big comment that you’d like to share or -? Just real quick, go ahead, share your comment. R. IIDA: I just want to say that when I went to the Planning Department about buying a property and rezoning, they asked me what my purpose of buying a property and I say beauty shop. And one of the worker was telling me why you want to buy property and change to beauty shop, just go to Downtown and just open a shop, or can do it at home. Why you want to -? I mean, they have no idea. I don’t believe home occupying doing business and home same place. I mean, I have two kids and they running all over the place. And even though partially I’m living on the property I bought, I really believe that business and living have to be separate for the children, you know, safety. And maybe people looking at me like, oh, she can do it home and just, you know, why she want a rezoning? I am not trying to sell it or I’m trying to make huge company out of it. I have a couple of girls like me looking for place to running a business and they don’t know where to go. And I really want a helper to work with me, have a nice parking lot, and not so busy and not in Downtown, not in Keaau -- something right in, you know, KTA is such a nice location -- and around there they don’t have nice location that we can work with. Looking around the barber shop, I mean, they have no place to park. People ask me go to Downtown somewhere renting upstairs. I mean I don’t even know you getting around Downtown, and people keep pushing away -. Doing hair is not big deal for them but for me all my life doing hair; and I have a couple of girls they looking for a place to renting it out. Home occupy only can ask for one part time in doing this and doing that. I’m not trying to run away like 10 or 20 hairdressers, maybe a couple more hairdressers that really looking for a place working with me. You know, clean and nice place. That’s the only reason I’m doing this. And lot of people asking me do the home occupy and do the barbershop in Downtown somewhere, but I totally disagree with the home occupy. ALAMEDA: Okay, all right. I just wanted to make sure that you could get your last final opinion. Okay, we have any motions? We have a recommendation by the Department, so just to know that if you go against the recommendation and go in favor then we’ve got to get some reasons behind that, yeah? Commissioner Iwashita, oh, conditions, yeah? IWASHITA: I move as to Item 3, Application Jinsoo and Ran Hui Iida (REZ 07- 000073), Change of Zone from Single Family Residential 10,000 square feet (RS-10) to a Neighborhood Commercial 20,000 square feet (CN-20) for 23,559 square feet of land, etc., that the Commission forward a favorable recommendation to the County Council with conditions, and I’m going to just sort of scrounge off of the prior application. And they would be: A. Delete B. So C would be B, water commitment. C is construction of the proposed improvements in five (5) years. D would be what’s F. I’m not sure that a EXHIBIT C 14 5-foot wide future road widening, I’m not sure if that’s the exact correct amount. E would be the current G, provide full provide full improvements to the entire frontage along Kilauea Avenue and so forth. F would be parking on site. G would be height limitation to 35 feet. H would be all development-generated runoff kept on the property. I would be Solid Waste Management Plan. J would be the applicant, successors, or assigns develop, if they develop residential units then all of those conditions. K would be the standard language for a unified impact fee ordinance compliance. L would be the compliance with Goals and Policies of the Housing Element of the General Plan. M would be Emergency Response Plan. N would be the applicant comply with all County, State, Federal laws. O would be the annual progress report requirement. P would be the extension language. And Q would be the consequences for noncompliance with conditions. ALAMEDA: Is there a second? DOMINGO: Second. ALAMEDA: Motion made by Commissioner Iwashita, that includes the recommendations that he just stated which was taken from the prior agenda item. And it was seconded by Commissioner Domingo. Discussion? Commissioner Watanabe. WATANABE: I’m not going to vote in favor of it. However, I do have a recommendation for Commissioner Iwashita. He did have a condition for emergency evacuation plan, but I think that’s generally something that we’d put in like a tidal wave area, low-lying flood zone kind of area. You might want to, considering this location, you might want to remove that. I don’t think it would apply. IWASHITA: Yeah, that’s fine. I guess I was thinking about earthquake or lava flow or something. ALAMEDA: All right. So for the record, Commissioner Iwashita is okay with removing that particular condition about the evacuation plan. Any other discussion? Well, we have a motion on the table right now and it’s seconded. And so I’m going to ask for the roll if there’s no further discussion. And keep in mind we need five to agree; and if there’s disagreement then I suspect it will come back again, and we’ll be seeing you again here because it’s within the 90 days, yeah. Okay, Mr. Darrow, roll call. DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The motion before us is to send a favorable recommendation to the Hawaii County Council with conditions stated by Commissioner Iwashita. With that I’ll take the roll. Commissioner Iwashita? IWASHITA: Yes. DARROW: Commissioner Domingo? DOMINGO: Aye. EXHIBIT C 15 DARROW: Commissioner Ogata? OGATA: No. DARROW: Commissioner Watanabe? WATANABE: Nay. DARROW: Commissioner Woodward? WOODWARD: Aye. DARROW: And Mr. Chairman? ALAMEDA: No. DARROW: The motion does not pass three to three. ALAMEDA: So it’s a tie-tie. So we’ll be back, you guys will be back. Can we make a motion to put it to the next agenda? WATANABE: Move to continue this matter to the next -. W. IIDA: Can you just send it up now as unfavorable or you have to wait -? ALAMEDA: The question is if, Mr. Darrow, could you explain if we could just send, the question was if we could just send it up with an unfavorable recommendation to the County Council, or do we have to hear it again since it’s within the 90 days? DARROW: It’s my understanding that we have to continue this matter for that 90-day period. So we will need to revisit this matter possibly two more times. But it will be placed on the agenda in December, I believe the date is December 7th. ALAMEDA: And the reason, you know, the more Commissioners you might have a different vote. So we’ve got to follow that process. Okay. WATANABE: Okay, I’ll move to continue this Change of Zone Application REZ 07-000073 to the next Hilo meeting. DOMINGO: Second. ALAMEDA: Good. Motion made to continue this agenda item to the next Hilo meeting and there’s a second. COMMISSIONERS: Aye. EXHIBIT C 16 ALAMEDA: So noted. All right, well, thank you very much. You’ll be informed in writing of this decision; and we’ll see you again. Okay. The discussion ended at 12:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon M. Nomura, East Hawai‘i Secretary EXHIBIT C 17